Considering solely the performances in the trial, my verdict is that Position One proved their case better than Position Two. This is a difficult decision to make, however, because the terms were so unclear. About halfway through the trial, it was made clear that the two sides seemed to be arguing two different sides, Position One from the viewpoint of omniscient, God-like creatures like the Dragon who could see all things, while Position Two is from the viewpoint of mere mortals trying to make their way in the world whatever way they can, and be happy whatever way they can. As a human, of course, it is easy to say that life is meaningful because of the various ways people make life meaningful in life, for example, Unferth's "inner heroism", but it is impossible to obtain perspective on eternity, all-time, in which human lives are insignificant specks in the viewpoint of Position One. Another setback was the difference in the time we received to cross-examine the opposition's witnesses. However, I think overall Position One did a better job proving their case because their witnesses were true to their real characters in the book, and their lawyers had logical questions to press the other witnesses in cross examination, even within their limited time frame. On the other hand, Position Two sometimes had confusing or self-contradictory arguments and testaments from their witnesses, for example, when their Shaper admitted that what he did was make a meaningless life seem meaningful to humans by spinning illusions for them.
On that note, although I say that I'd support Position One over Position Two in reference to the trial, in real life I couldn't ever be nihilistic enough to even think about agreeing with Position One. Position Two argues that for humans, even if their lives are a meaningless speck in the grand scale of time, and yes, every one of them will one day die, and even if there is no God to measure their values for them, life can still be meaningful while they are yet living. Just because you're going to die one day doesn't make your life before that day worthless; on the contrary it makes it all the more precious and meaningful. Therefore, because Position Two speaks from a human point of view, and I am human, outside of the trial I'd support Position Two.
Considering solely the performances in the trial, my verdict is that Position One proved their case better than Position Two. This is a difficult decision to make, however, because the terms were so unclear. About halfway through the trial, it was made clear that the two sides seemed to be arguing two different sides, Position One from the viewpoint of omniscient, God-like creatures like the Dragon who could see all things, while Position Two is from the viewpoint of mere mortals trying to make their way in the world whatever way they can, and be happy whatever way they can. As a human, of course, it is easy to say that life is meaningful because of the various ways people make life meaningful in life, for example, Unferth's "inner heroism", but it is impossible to obtain perspective on eternity, all-time, in which human lives are insignificant specks in the viewpoint of Position One. Another setback was the difference in the time we received to cross-examine the opposition's witnesses. However, I think overall Position One did a better job proving their case because their witnesses were true to their real characters in the book, and their lawyers had logical questions to press the other witnesses in cross examination, even within their limited time frame. On the other hand, Position Two sometimes had confusing or self-contradictory arguments and testaments from their witnesses, for example, when their Shaper admitted that what he did was make a meaningless life seem meaningful to humans by spinning illusions for them.
On that note, although I say that I'd support Position One over Position Two in reference to the trial, in real life I couldn't ever be nihilistic enough to even think about agreeing with Position One. Position Two argues that for humans, even if their lives are a meaningless speck in the grand scale of time, and yes, every one of them will one day die, and even if there is no God to measure their values for them, life can still be meaningful while they are yet living. Just because you're going to die one day doesn't make your life before that day worthless; on the contrary it makes it all the more precious and meaningful. Therefore, because Position Two speaks from a human point of view, and I am human, outside of the trial I'd support Position Two.